It has been mentioned that the Septet Formulae of Species document linked to from the RHA website may not be accurate or that there are some educated guesses for some of the roses listed.
I dont suppose anyone has went through the list and validated which ones were confirmed and which ones are not confirmed. Perhaps we could modify the web page and color code it. Roses that are validated as having the correct ploidy could have a green dot, ones that are in dispute could have a red dot and ones that no one has a clue about could have a yellow dot?
Perhaps expand it?
I guess I could do it and host it but I am not the best person for knowing what ones are correct and what ones are not. I would need a lot of help from everyone else.
David Z, do you have a publish list of all the roses you have tested ploidy levels for?
Some of them do seem off, Steven.
I have never been able to get a copy of Grossi and Jay’s 2002 article in which they reported the results for 41 roses. Can anyone post their findings?
Published in: Acta Bot. Gallica 149 (4) : pages 405-413 (2002)
Title: Chromosomes studies of rose cultivars : application into selection process
Authors: C
I would love to see it as well Henry. I tried to see if they had this periodical at the U of MN library and they stopped carrying it in 1995. On line the journal seems to just have the abstract, but doesn’t have pdf’s or another way spelled out to access the full article. Darn.
I have been having trouble getting my article on pollen diameter and ploidy published. After I finish up some revisions on an accepted article, this will be the next one I’ll go back to working on and resubmit it. One large stumbling block to getting it in print is that the technology isn’t “new”. Journals have an impact factor based on how many times their articles are cited in other journals. The more “impact” they have the better for them. So, the higher impact journals can be pickier for the articles they accept and they can begin to specialize more because they have more articles to choose from. If articles have unique biological questions as well as unique techniques described perhaps more people will cite them contributing to keeping the impact factor high. I got some good suggestions on some basic framing of the article to tweek. I’ll do that and resubmit it. After it is in print all that data will be available. I know I’ve piped up now and then sharing ploidy on different roses as they are talked about on the forum. Many of the higher impact journals make their money from library subscriptions and do not charge authors page charges. Many of the smaller journals have $100 per page page charges. I’ll try again to get it in a journal that doesn’t charge page charges. The article will probably be 12-15 pages with all the tables and it would be nice not to have to save up $1,200 + to have it printed.
Sincerely,
David
I’m really thankful I have the Grossi article now. Someone sent it to me. I’m not sure if they would mind me naming them, so I won’t here. What a nice article looking at ploidy levels of a group of roses and then making crosses based on different ploidy levels and reporting the crossing success.
They used root tip squashes and direct chromosome counts rather than flow cytometry. I wonder about a couple of their roses though and if they might have gotten a different cultivar or if there are a couple versions sold as something floating out there. The two roses are Ballerina and New Dawn. They report their Ballerina is triploid and New Dawn is diploid. I counted the chromosomes of what is sold at least commonly in the US as Ballerina as being diploid. Actually Yokoyo et al. 2000 report it as diploid as well. I haven’t counted what is sold as New Dawn here. It is reported by others as being triploid, so I didn’t think I needed to. I think this paper and research is a really nice work and don’t want to seem like I’m detracting from it.
I suppose much of the variable chromosome number for cultivars may often be associated with mislabeling and distribution of cultivars. I was just surprised by that again recently. ‘Surrey’ purchased by a friend from two different West coast nurseries look alike, but are different from the plant of ‘Surrey’ at the MN Landscape arboretum. They are all pink and and would be easy to mix up reading just general descriptions of what it should look like. I like to take cuttings and share roses with others as do other people. Depending on where nurseries get their stock and how well the roses were labeled that the cuttings came from all seem to be places along the way that mixups happen. At large nurseries I hear about hard working people getting paid by the cutting working fast and before they know it have cuttings mixed between blocks of stock plants. As I look at local landscapes it’s funny sometimes to see a wonderful hedge of John Davis roses with one John Cabot mixed in or a huge planting of Champlain with one Louis Jolliet mixed in. Perhaps cutting mix ups in production and lack of removing them when they flower and show themselves different led to these odd roses mixed in. I don’t know.
I think that chromosome counting is a great tool (along with DNA analysis and other means) to gather data to begin to detect and sort through mix ups.
Sincerely,
David
Sounds like an interesting article.
David, could you or your friend possibly email a copy to me?
Thanks
Jinks
Is it possible for the triploid New Dawn to revert to Dr. Van Fleet, maybe diploid?
That pesky Ballerina. Now I have diploid from Yokoya et al., tetraploid from the Leen Leus PhD thesis using flow cytometry and now triploid. Something strange is going on.
I have seen a lot of bushes in town what can be Ballerina, yesterday ectect. I have searched on HMF to ID it but their are a lot of simular flowers. Is the amouth of cultivars not one of the reasons why thinks get mixed up? I was wondering if ‘new’ color roses are any special nowadays because their are a lot of roses with the same looks.
I notice now how difficult roses are with genetics and changes when I’m reading stuff like this topic.
From Cass Bernstein
"That pesky Ballerina. Now I have diploid from Yokoya et al., tetraploid from the Leen Leus PhD thesis using flow cytometry and now triploid. Something strange is going on. "
Ballerina is not in the PhD of Leen Leus.
I once measured Ballerina, and it is diploid.
The confusion is with Bonica. The Bonica I measured is Meidomonac and is tetraploid, while David counts say it is diploid.
regards,
leen
Hi Leen,
I hope you are doing great. I counted it as triploid, you probably meant to say that. THere is a gentleman I have been Emailing here in the US and he brought root tips of his Bonica to a friend of his skilled in cytology and found his plant to be triploid as well. He was really surprised because his plant is full of hips. Perhaps we have a different clone in the US than Belgium. Have you had the opportunity to do a root tip squash on your Bonica?
I really enjoy reading your papers Leen and am excited when I come across a new one.
Sincerely,
David